The beginning of the end

English: Road Ends sign used in New South Wale...
Road Ends sign used in New South Wales, Australia. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Guest post by Dr. Vincent Gray


APRIL 25th 2013

I have been neglecting you. Things have quieted down. I am 91 and it is high time I retired, like my friend Will Alexander in South Africa or my major protagonist, former Professor Martin Manning.. I thought I would call it a day on Newsletter No 300.

When I began, in 1991 I was still in China. I got involved in commenting on the Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and I just completed those on the Fifth Report which will surely be my last.

To begin with I was the only critical voice in New Zealand. Last week I attended a packed meeting of the Press Club in Wellington to hear Lord Monckton tear apart the IPCC and everything connected with it. The University scientists will not listen to him. But one of the organisers of the meeting was from the Music Department.

But, surely, we are at the beginning of the end.

The globe has stopped warming; even when measured by the botched-up biased system that they favour.

The Kyoto Protocol is dead. Emissions by former members are in steady decline compared with those from non-members

The support literature has dried up. I used to go to the University every month and photocopy the latest scientific outrage for these Newsletters. The only recent feeble attempt was the rapidly discredited attempt by Marcott to fabricate yet another Hockey Stick at

The “Economist” magazine has expressed doubts

A recent report by the Influential [Norwegian] Research Institute SINTEF at

has shown that there is a genuine scientific controversy that should be encouraged; that it is by no means, “settled”

The Emissions Trading scheme is in retreat. European prices have headed for the bottom and they.are about to ditch their scheme. I do not know what has happened to our prices but you can all be assured that whatever happens to the Mighty River Power shares the incentives to go in for windmills and solar power will disappear and we can, eventually have a sensible, economical power policy which will include fracking, coal and small scale nuclear.

But you would hardly think so, listening to all of our politicians, or if you read the newspapers or watch TV. So let me finish by encouraging you all with this article by James Delingpole


Vincent Gray


New Zealand

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
April 25, 2013 2:05 pm

SINTEF is in Norway.

April 25, 2013 2:09 pm

How do they get off a Free Way
Where they forgot to build exits
Exit 00 they see comming yet
No exit exist to use
Fatefull flaw for fast movers.
Wrap the windmills and call it art
Electric cars do not play music
Stock fraud has cases and they hope
John Corzin is a good sign for them.
Exit 00 seen out side the bus window
Late at night with a money hunger hang over
Fear at first, Is this real or something else I made up
Panic for some for days and months now
More than the quite desperation known prior.
A Free Way of No Return
They see, they know, it came
Now they just stare
Stare at you, stare at me, stare at the judge.
Judge has the gavel, raised,,,,

April 25, 2013 2:15 pm

Dr Gray has a must read history of the GHG hypothesis,”The Greenhouse and It’s Effect” posted in July 2011. I recommend supplementing this with the original translation from French of the Fourier statements and the full transcript of the Tyndall absorption experiments posted at Timothy Casey’s Geologist-1011 site, both with after notes. In addition, the “History of Radiation” by Dr Matthias Kleespies will complete the history background necessary to confirm….that the GHG hypothesis has the false history provenance to accompany the false science.
Dr Gray also has posted his autobiography of his colorful life along with his contributions to science and humanity. Bless you Good Sir !

Bob Diaz
April 25, 2013 2:17 pm

The first part of this song seems to fit:

Robert of Ottawa
April 25, 2013 2:18 pm

Thank you for all your efforts, Vince.

Janice Moore
April 25, 2013 2:24 pm

Dear Dr. Gray, thank you for all your hard work for hard science. WELL DONE!
I believe you are right, it is, indeed, “the beginning of the end.” And Sir Winston Churchill would I am most sure join me in giving you a standing ovation and would, I have no doubt, go so far as to say that it is at least “the end of the beginning.”

April 25, 2013 2:34 pm

If I had a dime for every time that some AGW skeptic had declared this was the beginning of the end for AGW over the last 20 years, I’d be much richer than I am.
REPLY: No, you wouldn’t, because nobody would pay you for your whining condescending attitude constantly on display – Anthony

April 25, 2013 2:37 pm

There is a list, maybe in Heaven, of the human beings who stood up to agw hysteria. Anthony Watts, Steve McIntyre, James Delingpole, JoNova, Willis the eagle, Bob Tisdale, and so many I forget. Vincent Gray is high on that list. Maybe way down at the end I’m on it too
Ther is another list, hopefully in HELL of those who promoted this scam. Mikey Mann, Jimbo Hansen, Seth Borenstein, and especially Al Gore. Dante did not create or imagine an Inferno hot or Cold enought for this bunch.
To me what is significant in this post is simply there has been a quieting of the media, academia, and the political sphere (other then the country idiot, Obama) about agw. More and more media, politico, and even citizens are speaking out about the farce. I smell a tidal wave coming which will wash Mann and his ilk to oblivion and social disgrace. With the internet and 24/7 news the world changes in a blink. Mikey Mann better blink fast, his day is coming.

April 25, 2013 2:41 pm

Thanks, Dr. Gray, you have done good.

April 25, 2013 2:43 pm

Maybe you havent seen Obama’s latest tweets about “climate deniers”.
I’m afraid there is a long way to go yet.

Sam the First
April 25, 2013 2:44 pm

Will somebody please tell The Guardian and Nutty Chelli?

a jones
April 25, 2013 2:48 pm

The beginning of the End? I doubt it. These pernicious political perversions of science and moral panics tend to linger on for generations. But that it is the end of the beginning I am certain. The damage done is appalling but again that is usual: note how the UK is hurriedly attempting to innoculate against measles purely because of a scientific fraud which got much publicity from the MSM that it was dangerous. The emergency programme will work but people will still die from that unfounded scare which reached it’s peak of twenty years ago.
The unravelling of the groundless CO2 AGW alarmism will take longer, partly because it involves the energy industries which have long time scales, and partly because it still has a corrupt financial base supported by politicians and activists which took thirty years to build: and intended to defraud the hapless citizen: who has little defence against such shenigans.
But nevertheless dying it clearly is, not least because the WWW allowed concerned citizens a voice that they had not had before.
So I doubt it is the beginning of the end but it is a clear signal of the end of the beginning for a whole class of politicians, their financial cronies, their bureaucrats and all their activists and fellow travellers.
It is going to be a whole new world, the WWW you see is returning the power to the people.
Interesting times. .
Kindest Regards

April 25, 2013 2:54 pm

dunno….Calif is still surging ahead…..

Janice Moore
April 25, 2013 3:02 pm

If I had a dime for every time that some [whining[ly] condescending] joe said, “If I had a dime…,” I’d be much richer than I am.
Go, ANTHONY! [:)]
@ Stan Stendera — You DEFINITELY are on the list of Valiant Warriors for Truth!
Whether or not it is the beginning of the end or just the “end of the beginning,” VICTORY is assured.

April 25, 2013 3:03 pm

Dr. Gray, as much as your facts are perfectly fine, I unfortunately think this is no cause for optimism and that the multi billion dollars world governance lobby will use any excuse to make “coups d’etat”, and subvert democratic processes to impose their rackett. I would truly be happy to be proven wrong…

April 25, 2013 3:09 pm

New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears
Posted By Marc Morano – Marc_Morano@EPW.Senate.Gov – 4:44 PM ET
Washington DC – An abundance of new peer-reviewed studies, analyses, and data error discoveries in the last several months has prompted scientists to declare that fear of catastrophic man-made global warming “bites the dust” and the scientific underpinnings for alarm may be “falling apart.” The latest study to cast doubt on climate fears finds that even a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide would not have the previously predicted dire impacts on global temperatures. This new study is not unique, as a host of recent peer-reviewed studies have cast a chill on global warming fears.

April 25, 2013 3:09 pm

end times!
Barclays parts company with coal, carbon head
LONDON, April 25 (Reuters Point Carbon) – Louis Redshaw, Barclays bank’s head of carbon, coal and iron ore, has resigned his position as managing director, the second high profile loss on one of the carbon market’s biggest trading desks within the past three months…
ICE suspends trade in spot carbon credits
LONDON, April 25 (Reuters Point Carbon) – London-based ICE Futures Europe will suspend trade in its spot Certified Emissions Reductions (CERs) from close of business on Thursday to give it time to update the contract’s specifications, the bourse said…
REUTERS POLL-Analysts cut carbon price forecasts to 2020
LONDON, April 25 (Reuters) – Analysts have slashed forecasts for all European Union and United Nations’ carbon permit prices to 2020 after EU politicians rejected a plan to bolster the carbon market, sending prices to record lows…

jack morrow
April 25, 2013 3:13 pm

TomRude says
Correct sir- the ones in power have an agenda and–they are in control.

April 25, 2013 3:29 pm

Thankfully this tedious season of “The Great Global Warming Caper” is all but over. The rubenesque diva is reaching into the props box for the hat with the horns and the buses are warming up. Sadly for all the players in this sorry production they will not be moving on to new productions of “Bio-crisis! Bio-crisis! or “Sense and Sustainability”. This is the age of the Internet. They can scrub like Lady Macbeth, they can even use the Scotchbrite, but the filthy stain of AGW advocacy wilt not out. They lied, they censored and they vilified. Every pseudo scientist, journalist, activist, subsidy farmer and politician who promoted or sought to profit from this hoax will be held to account. Sceptics will never forgive and the Internet will never forget.

April 25, 2013 3:43 pm

@Janice Moore
If you knew how happy your comment above made me feel you would have put it in neon blinking caps!

April 25, 2013 3:45 pm

The decision making paradigm in the sciences are divergent. In pure science, the fact such as Aristotle’s concept of a heavy object falling faster than a ligther object stood the test of time as it was accepted for almost 2,000 years in a geographic area covering almost the whole Euro-asia land mass by some 1,000,000 learned men ( an average of 500 men claiming to be scholars) but it took only one person and an experiment to throw the whole concept out. On the other hand in jurisprudence, the decision of two judges concurring over the third judge is the law. The climate change debate has been going in circle because the pure scientists looks at the debate from their point of view that there is no such thing as consensus while the social activists looks at the debate from their perspective that UN and most governments have agreed on the UNFCCC ( the Kyoto is nothing more than the implementing rules of the UNFCCC) then that must be the law. There are a number of theories on the development of public policies and it would be important for pure scientists to note that in the development of public policies one of the basic principle is the “core beliefs” and the scientific facts are nothing more than screens to cover the core beliefs. Policy activist against the global warming debate should try to identify the window of opportunity to challenge the” core belief”. The economic crisis, the high unemployment rates and other shocks that affected the social and economic landscape of the developed world is a window of opportunity that must be exploited as it is much stronger than any of the scientific facts in changing the direction of public policy. For those interested in knowing more on the theories on how public policy changes direction could consult Prof. Sabatier’s excellent book on the subject.

April 25, 2013 3:46 pm

If it wasn’t for Hockey Sticks (ie: FrankenGraphs), unconnectable anecdotes, and worthless computer projections the agw crowd doesn’t have a leg to stand on.

April 25, 2013 3:48 pm

The Climate Cronies have the pockets of the politicians, the degenerate minds of University intellectuals, and pet media poodles. A very small percentage by head count, compared with their downstream victims.
We have millions of unemployed globally, we have billions looking at energy and food prices ever increasing, while wages and salaries are erroded by casino economics, we have a lot of very intelligent and angry people looking at these Cronies with much wiser eyes.
The Cronies have no control, they are shouting their fairy tales as loud as possible, to drown out the discontented murmur, from the Humanity they betrayed.
All they have is volume.
As Will says…
“Out, out, brief candle! Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” Macbeth Quote (Act V, Scene V).
Struts over Climate Cronies. Now comes the long walk to the Gallows.

April 25, 2013 4:03 pm

The problem with us sceptics … is that we are fast becoming mainstream.
And that will be the end of us sceptics – for what role is there for sceptics when everyone agrees with us?

Argiris Diamantis
April 25, 2013 4:07 pm

May-be it’s like Sir Winston Churchill once said: This is not the end, this is not even the beginning of the end, but it is the end of the beginning.
The greenies/warmists will not give that easily. First climate fraud David Viner predicted in 2000 that within decades snow would be a thing of the past. Children just wouldn’t know what snow was. Now the same people are blaming global warming for the terrible cold and heavy snowfall of recent years. Cooling is the new warming. But let’s hope the end of the global warming aka climate change nonsense will come soon. Each day this delusional hoax lasts is a day too many.

van Loon
April 25, 2013 4:20 pm

Don’t underestimate the time it takes to seep in, easily 15-20 years.

Mark Hladik
April 25, 2013 4:28 pm

‘Tis oft said that once the CAGW meme has been abandoned , the wacko leftie greenies of the world will simply move on to the next catastrophe-du-jour.
That “catastrophe” is likely going to be their oft-misspelled “fracking”, a process which as been used for decades, and is an old standard practice in the oil patch.
My niece sent me an article this morning, and asked me my ‘professional opinion’ of it. Sad to say it is long on drivel, mis-representation of information, and political advocacy.
In other words, same-‘ol, same-‘ol.
Mark H.

April 25, 2013 4:37 pm

What a fine fellow. even if he is wrong, he is dignified, calm and overflows with integrity.
if he is right (and I believe he is) I am proud to be in his thread 🙂

April 25, 2013 4:38 pm

I dunno. When rats abandon a sinking ship they find another floating one…

Dr T G Watkins
April 25, 2013 4:44 pm

Thank you for your significant contributions Dr Gray.
It may well be the beginning of the end but the end is still a very long way away. Too many politicians have committed themselves to this madness and too many politicians, ‘scientists’ and renewables experts depend on this meme for their present and future economic well-being.
The whole scare is political rather than scientific as we all here know.
Agenda 21, Globe and various other programs need to be widely publicised.

Richard G
April 25, 2013 4:47 pm

Mike Haseler says:April 25, 2013 at 4:03 pm
“The problem with us sceptics … is that we are fast becoming mainstream.
And that will be the end of us sceptics – for what role is there for sceptics when everyone agrees with us?”
I am looking forward to being a skeptic who is out of work. Lets move on to more productive endeavors.

April 25, 2013 4:59 pm

Mike Haseler says:
The problem with us sceptics … is that we are fast becoming mainstream.
And that will be the end of us sceptics – for what role is there for sceptics when everyone agrees with us?
Sadly, there is plenty of other scientific malpractice and dubious statistics to go after if one is so inclined. The medical field would be particularly fertile.

Bruce Cobb
April 25, 2013 5:02 pm

The jig is up for climastrologists, and everyone knows it. Still, they’ll soldier on, not knowing what else to do. The top brass are just figuring an easy way out that doesn’t involve jail time. The infestation of government and schools with CAGW ideology will be tough to crack.
In five years it will be dead. The aftermath won’t be pretty.

April 25, 2013 5:11 pm

Thanks to Dr. Gray and to Marc Morano for the EBW link. Devastating. How anybody can believe the feces coming out of the AGWers’ sphincters is beyond me. Last I looked, the definition of science wasn’t “feces.”
As for the anti-frackers, let’s send them the bill for any increase in gasoline prices we have to pay due to their malicious, perverted stupidity. And then prohibit them from using any kind of energy from any source (including burning excrement!) for any purpose (or maybe, as a gesture of mercy, let them burn feces to cook their food).

Lil Fella from OZ
April 25, 2013 5:13 pm

Thank you for all your efforts in science Dr.Gray. Enjoy putting your feet up you deserve it.
Please note, I heard the Chairman of the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, state in an interview this year while visiting OZ that it would take many more years of non warming to change the thinking at IPCC. I think it was something like 40 years. Enough said!

April 25, 2013 5:14 pm

Well done D. Gray! I’m sure after a few months of fiddling around it would be nice to have your learned comments kick even more sense into a deaf world in print and television.

Peter Ramsey
April 25, 2013 5:15 pm

Obama is a dictator.
Congress can’t stop him.
Who you gonna call, the CIA?
The national debt is over $16 trillion, China is buying up oilfields in Texas and if anyone fights back, he will declare martial law.
AGW theory was just another “trojan horse”, it keeps honest scientists busy while the Marxist academics help the CIA organize for the “final solution”.
Meanwhile, oh forget it…
Boston was just a dress rehearsal.
Lenin called for an alliance with Islamic nationalists in 1924.
Communism in Russia is gone now but they still have Muslim terrorists.
The climate has changed, you’re a Muslim now and you don’t even know it.

April 25, 2013 5:18 pm

Opalek PE:
No legs to stand on, but that huge pile of feces they have excreted may still prop them up for a while.

Ben D.
April 25, 2013 5:25 pm

“The beginning of the end”
The climax for the climatologists will be a happy ending, the hockey stick will wilt…

April 25, 2013 5:28 pm

joeldshore says:
April 25, 2013 at 2:34 pm
If I had a dime for every time that some AGW skeptic had declared this was the beginning of the end for AGW over the last 20 years, I’d be much richer than I am.
Yeah, and if you had a dime for every piece of direct evidence you could post showing that CO2 has any effect on global temperature, global climate change, climate weirding, climate crisis or climate nom du jour, you’d have the square root of f**k all.

April 25, 2013 5:29 pm

Dear Dr. Grey,
Thankyou so very much, for your unstinting work in helping bulwark rational science.
At 91 years of age, you deserve your rest but even more-so, you deserve agknowlwedgement that your labours have not been in vain. If not for the strict empirical instincts of an older, wiser, generation of scientists and engineers found frequenting this page, then the presumpion of apriori certitude conjured up from the entrails of non-linear, computer modelled conjecture, might have gone unchallenged in its purported claims at constituting ‘hard’ scientific evidence.
May I join all those priori in offering heartfelt thanks.
With Much Regard.

April 25, 2013 5:35 pm

Dr T G Watkins says:
April 25, 2013 at 4:44 pm
Thank you for your significant contributions Dr Gray.
It may well be the beginning of the end but the end is still a very long way away. Too many politicians have committed themselves to this madness and too many politicians, ‘scientists’ and renewables experts depend on this meme for their present and future economic well-being.
The whole scare is political rather than scientific as we all here know.
Agenda 21, Globe and various other programs need to be widely publicised.

All true, but perhaps therein lies the solution. We can vote the bums out!
It is long past time to start making politicians declare their positions on energy, climate, energy, CAGW, energy, ‘global governance’, energy—and energy. And then to make it clear to the voting public that candidates against fracking, coal mining, drilling, nuclear electricity, and all the other options we have for cheap, plentiful energy the world over—those candidates are anti-progress, anti-growth, anti-development, anti-prosperity, anti-jobs, and anti-everything-we-want-for-our-children.
Make that the mantra, and drum it into the voters heads, and they will start to turn out the socialist lapdogs of the ‘enviro’ movement. It’s time to make ‘environmentalism’ and ‘sustainability’ the dirty words they are.
The Climatists are working to propagandize the voters (and especially the young); it’s time to turn the tables on them. It is, as we’ve said, at bottom not a scientific but a political problem, and it’s going to take better politics to defeat them.
/Mr Lynn

April 25, 2013 5:40 pm

Such clarity of mind – it is much too early for you to retire. Please keep going until you are 100.

April 25, 2013 5:51 pm

Peter Ramsey says:
“Obama is a dictator.
Congress can’t stop him.
…and if anyone fights back, he will declare martial law.”
Anyone who believes that Obama is not waiting for the next major crisis to declare martial law, suspend habeus corpus, and rule by decree is hopelessly naive. He is truly the Manchurian Candidate.
Anyway, thanks, Dr Gray. You have been fighting the good fight. Agree w/Julian in Wales.

April 25, 2013 5:53 pm

Everyone, make sure you save everything you can, making backup electronic and hard copies, to document the crash when it comes, and tend them well. In 20 years, we will need the evidence of what happened to fend off the next generation of power mad control freaks who want to save us from Catastrophic Global Cooling.

April 25, 2013 5:53 pm

Thank you Dr. Gray!
AGW is beginning to look more and more like road kill on the information highway. It needs to be run over by the facts of physical reality a few more times.
Al Gore, one of the funders for the highway, seems be one of the larger road kills. The irony must hurt. Good deeds do not go unpunished.
The powers that be must be incredibly annoyed at the internet, and would probably like to limit access to it.

April 25, 2013 6:17 pm

Way to go Doctor Gray!
I would also like to state my appreciation for the decades you’ve spent with weather, climate while keeping the anti-science alarmists at bay.
As you’re someone who has retired before, what do you plan to do next?


says: April 25, 2013 at 2:34 pm
Who he?
;-> “I couldn’t resist; the devil made me do it.” /sarc

Theo Goodwin
April 25, 2013 6:36 pm

Mike Haseler says:
April 25, 2013 at 4:03 pm
“The problem with us sceptics … is that we are fast becoming mainstream.
And that will be the end of us sceptics – for what role is there for sceptics when everyone agrees with us?”
Mike, thanks for the set up. Now I will hit the ball out of the park.
The price of science is eternal, energetic, and unrelenting skepticism.
Skepticism must become a reflex in every scientist, every student of science, and every citizen. Every university department of science and every secondary teacher of science needs their own Anthony Watts until all have internalized Anthony Watts. The statists have already taken over the universities and they have established beachheads in all of the secondary schools. We have a lot of work to do.

April 25, 2013 7:48 pm

Dear Dr Gray, thank you and all your fellow anti-AGW whom withstood the ‘running of the gauntlet’ that many of us have endured. Australia is still hanging loose, but with a new government in September, we shall see. The present opposition have stated they will remove the carbon tax now at $23 per tonne. James Hansen years ago was promoting nuclear as we have such a huge coast line. But near Ballina, they are burning sugar cane refuse, that is usually burnt anyway by farmers, that is capable of providing electricity for 50,000 homes. Well outside cities most inland townships rarely exceed 50,000 population, and less homes and industries. But it does not get any government subsidies. Google ‘Ballina sugar cane electricity plant’. New Zealand should scrap their carbon tax too. Especially planning to tax agriculture. Moos and baas are nasty little creatures that belch and pass methane? (We do too!) One idiot suggested we farm kangaroos who are methane free instead of cattle and sheep? He was an adviser on the carbon tax debacle to the present government. Didn’t he know, kangaroos are marsupials and are not domesticated, jump fences and withhold mated eggs until the environment is suitable to bear another potential embryonic ‘joey’. He was the person advising the government on carbon tax realizations. Best of luck in your ‘retirement’ we will forever hold you in esteem with our grateful thanks.

Arno Arrak
April 25, 2013 7:53 pm

Good for you, Vincent. In five more years I will be caught up with you. In the meantime, there is that pseudoscience to smoke out. They invent a non-existent warming and then they want us to pay for saving the world from it. Arno

April 25, 2013 8:08 pm

To Konrad, very good post, I totally agree, but – what will they do with the existing solar panel subsidies to private homes, and also those land owners who are getting rich from rent on wind turbines. They had a great subsidy for rain water tanks as Oz generally has tap water, other than in some rural areas. (A huge dispersed population too). I put in a 5,000 litre tanks beside my house, to use for washing clothes and flushing one laundry toilet. I got full compensation at the time from the State and Federal governments. Only once in 5 years has the tank almost run out, so it had to be topped up enough by mains water to allow the pump to work. Only for a few weeks though and we managed OK.

Frank K.
April 25, 2013 8:09 pm

Sorry for piling on but…
“If I had a dime for every time that some warmist had declared this was the beginning of the end of civilization over the last 20 years, I’d be much richer than I am.”
PS: It’s been a chilly Spring here in New Hampshire…

William Astley
April 25, 2013 8:28 pm

Logic and reason has not reached the US. The EPA works independent of the government and continues to try to rule by regulation, regardless of the administration in power. The Obama administration appears to still be smoking the AGW hooch which appears to give them immunity to logic and reason. There is no extreme AGW problem to solve, regardless US spending on green scams will not solve the non problem.
New coal plants (13) are going into service in Germany as a modern coal plant is the lowest cost of power. There are 1000 coal plants planned to be placed in service in the next few years in other countries, 75% of them in China and India.
The US regulatory efforts and money spend on green scams such as the conversion of corn to ethanol which results in a net increase in CO2 emissions, if all energy inputs are considered, have only succeeded in making US industry less competitive and are an indirect tax on US consumers.
This is a link to a review paper that was prepared by EPA’s own scientist which supports the assertion that there is no AGW problem to solve. The EPA buried the report. The EPA and IPCC of course are completely ignoring the data and logic that indicates the majority of the 20th/21st warming was not due to the rise in atmospheric CO2.
“Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act”
Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act
I have become increasingly concerned that EPA has itself paid too little attention to the science of global warming. EPA and others have tended to accept the findings reached by outside groups, particularly the IPCC and the CCSP, as being correct without a careful and critical examination of their conclusions and documentation. If they should be found to be incorrect at a later date, however, and EPA is found not to have made a really careful independent review of them before reaching its decisions on endangerment, it appears likely that it is EPA rather than these other groups that may be blamed for any errors. Restricting the source of inputs into the process to these these two sources may make EPA’s current task easier but it may come with enormous costs later if they should result in policies that may not be scientifically supportable.
The failings are listed below in decreasing order of importance in my view: (See attached for details.)
1. Lack of observed upper tropospheric heating in the tropics (see Section 2.9 for a detailed discussion).
2. Lack of observed constant humidity levels, a very important assumption of all the IPCC models, as CO2levels have risen (see Section 1.7).
3. The most reliable sets of global temperature data we have, using satellite microwave sounding units, show no appreciable temperature increases during the critical period 1978-1997, just when the surface station data show a pronounced rise (see Section 2.4). Satellite data after 1998 is also inconsistent with the GHG/CO2/AGW hypothesis 2009 v
4. The models used by the IPCC do not take into account or show the most important ocean oscillations which clearly do affect global temperatures, namely, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, and the ENSO (Section 2.4). Leaving out any major potential causes for global warming from the analysis results in the likely misattribution of the effects of these oscillations to the GHGs/CO2 and hence is likely to overstate their importance as a cause for climate change.
5. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility of indirect solar variability (Section 2.5), which if important would again be likely to have the effect of overstating the importance of GHGs/CO2.
6. The models and the IPCC ignored the possibility that there may be other significant natural effects on global temperatures that we do not yet understand (Section 2.4). This possibility invalidates their statements that one must assume anthropogenic sources in order to duplicate the temperature record. The 1998 spike in global temperatures is very difficult to explain in any other way (see Section 2.4).
7. Surface global temperature data may have been hopelessly corrupted by the urban heat island effect and other problems which may explain some portion of the warming that would otherwise be attributed to GHGs/CO2. In fact, the Draft TSD refers almost exclusively in Section 5 to surface rather than satellite data.
“2.9 The Missing Heating in the Tropical Troposphere
Computer models based on the theory of GHG/CO2 warming predict that the troposphere in the tropics should warm faster than the surface in response to increasing CO2 concentrations, because that is where the CO2 greenhouse effect operates. Sun-Cosmic ray warming will warm the troposphere more uniformly.
The UN’s IPCC AR4 report includes a set of plots of computer model predicted rate of temperature change from the surface to 30 km altitude and over all latitudes for 5 types of climate forcings as shown below.

April 25, 2013 8:33 pm

If we were dealing with science it might be the beginning of the end, but we’re dealing with religion so this is just the beginning of the first millenium. You have a fine mind Dr Vincent Gray, it’s a pleasure to share a country with such as you.

April 25, 2013 8:37 pm

In four years there will be a significant climate change. It would seem Obama has great insight after all.

April 25, 2013 8:52 pm

Don’t underestimate the ability of politicians to ignore facts in their eagerness to sell a good story, especially when they can see money in it.
And don’t underestimate the eagerness of financiers to help politicians build a gravy train the lucky few can ride on…..

john robertson
April 25, 2013 9:05 pm

Thanks for your perseverance and honest Dr Gray.
Enjoy putting your feet up and fighting only the battles you chose.
I believe/intuit that this tool we are using, has been the wildcard for myth breaking.
What this ability to communicate, exchange info and access support has done is hard to evaluate.
But you have enabled many others to understand the faults in the IPCC’s selective use of science, this info has travelled around the world many times, mobilized many isolated realists and sped the exposure of this UN scam up by years.
Many commenters here will be surprised how quickly these artists scamper away from an enraged voting public.
As those brainwashed children, heavy handedly indoctrinated to react to a planetary warming, that has not existed in their entire lifetime, what better civics lessons?
Authority lies, attempts to install fear in children, to further their power.What the lesson? Kiddies?

john robertson
April 25, 2013 9:06 pm

Your honesty Dr Gray.

Janice Moore
April 25, 2013 9:13 pm

Stan Stendera,
I am so glad to hear that. My pleasure.
I almost started to make a list of Valiant Warriors for Science Truth just from the MANY super-wonderful scientist bloggers on WUWT, but, in such a sampling population, leaving out even one of its members would cause far more harm than any good my list would do. So, I’ll stop with a list of two: Dr. Gray and you, Stan Stendera.
Warm [but not warm – ing :)] regards,
P.S. I must say, though, that any of the fine posters on WUWT who have tried or who are trying to teach junior high or high school students or beginning science-major and or non-science-major college students math or physics or biology or chemistry. THANK YOU! Talk about fighting for truth in the trenches. YOU WONDERFUL TEACHERS AND PROFESSORS ARE THE UNSUNG HEROES in the war for truth. This non-science major will be FOREVER GRATEFUL for her dedicated, patient, excellent, teachers in the above subjects.

Chris G
April 25, 2013 9:19 pm

I don’t know. These liberal schemes work fine in times of largesse. But people are paying attention now as social programs begin to strain and buckle . My prediction is that by the time the economy rebounds in 6-7 years, enough time will have passed for these folks to move on to a different topic that is catastrophic, man made, global and requires immediate attention and your tax dollars now.

April 25, 2013 10:07 pm

I am a retired engineer with a background in the design and management of scientific studies. Three years ago, out of idle curiosity, I began to snoop around in global warming climatology. To view results from the validation of the IPCC climate models that I assumed to have taken place was the fastest way in which to come up to speed on the science of global warming. Thus, I began my investigation via a Web search on the statistical population underlying these models, for a statistical population was required for validation to have taken place. This search came up with nothing. If there was no statistical population, it was impossible for the climate models to have been validated and thus the methodology of the investigation of global warming that had been conducted by the climatologists could not have been scientific!
My Web search did come up with an article by Vincent Gray. The title of his article was “Spinning the Climate.”
In his article, Vincent described the reaction of IPCC management when he pointed out to them that their climate models were insusceptible to being validated. Their reaction was a deceptive argument of the kind that was known to philosophers as the “equivocation fallacy.” Subsequently, Vincent pointed this out in the article that he entitled “The triumph of doublespeak.” “Doublespeak” was a synonym for “equivocation.”
An “equivocation” is an argument in which a term changes meaning in the middle of this argument. By logical rule, one cannot properly draw a conclusion from an equivocation. To draw a conclusion is the “equivocation fallacy.”
Applications of the equivocation fallacy are the sole basis for alarm about CO2 emissions. We have Vincent to thank for alerting us to this deception.

Digital Olive
April 25, 2013 10:34 pm

Two of our champions hobnobbing in NZ – Sir Vincent and Sir Christopher – the vision warms the heart. And a “beginning of the end” prophecy to boot! The final nail in the coffin for for ICAGW would be the publication in a peer-reviewed journal a paper setting out the truth about climate change by one or both of our champions. (Or maybe Tony could step up to the plate)

April 25, 2013 10:58 pm

I wish it were the beginning of the end, but as long as the global warmers are rolling in dough they will crank out the junk and the press releases, all to be lapped up by a gullible public and journalists who pander to them.

April 25, 2013 11:13 pm

@ eo says:
April 25, 2013 at 3:45 pm
I think you raise an important point. It is the nature of how things are viewed and evaluated.
As you rightly point out, processes dependent on The Law, at least in its contemporary form, which has developed – not at at co-incidentally in accordance with the interests of lawyers and those who rely on structural societal processes for the justification of their role and advantages – from concepts of expression of “natural justice” to a system of administration only tangentially related to that, differ in nature from not just scientific inquiry but any reconciliation of reality with actions.
As highlighted by you, the decisions of courts are simply a matter of personal opinion dressed in this process to give the illusion of gravitas and certainty. There is no regard for the truth as being obligatory in reaching such a point of judgement in any case. “Plausability” of position measured solely as degree of conformity to this body of guidelines and the process around it dictate the outcome. A “lawyerly” manner of thinking and prosecuting an argument has different aims – to give advantage to those advocated for – and priorities to any dispassionate establishment of truth in any area, and is antithetical to that – and therefore science.
But this “standard” of “appraisal” and action has now come to be the dominate reference for anything in society, and does not preclude elements of manipulation and obscuring or misinterpreting truth, and in fact is integral to it. Such must be the case where outcomes are determined in this way.
So I think what we see in “Climate Science” is a reflection of this. It has been normalized across the board and in fact no-one expects anything different.
As you say, this issue is about addressing core beliefs, but I think it is also about making a clear distinction between these two antithetical positions.

April 25, 2013 11:26 pm

@ Konrad says:
April 25, 2013 at 3:29 pm
You are right to now focus on the actions of individuals. This issue from its inception has been created and driven by people, and their particular motives and requirements, not as many continue to have the delusion, people whose core position is always regard for truth as expressed through scientific processes, and the integrity of any application of that. Whilst that personal or collective element is to some degree is part of anything in society, in this case it is and always has been dominant.
Many individuals involved in this are perfectly aware of this, and it is the ultimate determinant of their actions. They have killed, are killing, and intend to continue to kill. For reasons of self-interest.
There are no excuses: no-one can now say “I didn’t know”. Not to hold these people to account would be the ultimate travesty – confirmation that if structural advantage can be gained, immunity is assured, and anything at all can occur.
It is existentially vital to hold these people to account.

April 25, 2013 11:30 pm

bushbunny says:
April 25, 2013 at 8:08 pm
Most of the Chinese solar panels will be dead due to individual cell failure and delaimation in 5 to 10 years. The aluminium and glass can be recycled.
I remember the water tank problem in OZ as I was there at the beginning. At uni I designed a domestic rainwater tank as part of a rotomolding project, with integrated hose reel and solar charged DC pump. I ran into problems with the marketing section of the course as at that time water rates were charged on property value not usage and there was no incentive to save water. However I think the drought shortly after had a greater impact on policy than petitions from students 😉
While I am an AGW sceptic, I am also an environmentalist. I don’t own a car and the only vehicles in our house are kayaks and bikes. I want a environmentally clean and responsible future. I also know we cannot achieve this from a foundation of lies.

April 25, 2013 11:49 pm

jc says:
April 25, 2013 at 11:26 pm
While Sun Tzu’s art of war indicates that you should always leave your enemy an avenue of escape, this is not possible for AGW supporters in the age of the Internet. The collapse of the AGW hoax is going to be very painful for some, but the pain of the few should not outweigh the needs of the many.
The fall of AGW hoax has been a significant test of freedom of speech and the power of the individual. Those at the endangered atmosphere conference never anticipated the Internet when they laid their plans. Those involved in the hoax should not be allowed to escape unscathed. The reason is is that it will send a vey clear message to any who would try something similar in the future.
That said, while the environmental movement and climate science have effectively destroyed themselves, some of their goals and science are still needed. Real pollution and environmental damage appears to be an accelerating problem in the developing world. We also need real climate science to deal with the issues raised for agriculture in the coming solar cycle 25. The only solution is new people.

April 26, 2013 12:31 am

joeldshore says:
April 25, 2013 at 2:34 pm
If I had a dime for every time that some AGW skeptic had declared this was the beginning of the end for AGW over the last 20 years, I’d be much richer than I am.

Maybe 20 years ago there were doubts cast about CAGW in the media. Ten years ago they were firmly on board. Today they are breaking ranks – Reuters, AP, The Economist, Daily Mail, Express, Telegraph etc.
The change of weather to harsher NH winters would have been unheared of 10 years ago. People are looking out their windows. The temperature standstill is clear to see according to Hansen, Pachauri, Met Office et. al. Carbon schemes are headed to failure, bankrupcies of some wind and solar companies is on the rise.
CAGW is not dead yet but if current trends continue 😉 it (will, might, could, may, possibley…) 😉 be over within 5 years. The last 5 months is not like 10 years ago.

William Holder
April 26, 2013 12:33 am

Thank you for your efforts.

Lew Skannen
April 26, 2013 12:46 am

says: April 25, 2013 at 2:34 pm
“If I had a dime for every time… etc”

Wow, if I had an increased tax burden for every time a warmist has used public money to indulge a fantasy….
Actually, given the funding that has been available to any AGW related fantasy I am a bit surprised that joeldshore HASN’T been getting dimes paid to him.

Ian Evans
April 26, 2013 12:47 am

Janice Moore says: ‘VICTORY is assured.’
Yes – but at what a cost!

Stephen Richards
April 26, 2013 1:31 am

joeldshore says:
April 25, 2013 at 2:34 pm
If I had a dime for every time that some AGW skeptic had declared this was the beginning of the end for AGW over the last 20 years, I’d be much richer than I am
Ifa I had a centime for everytime it’s ‘worse than we thought’, the world will drown, we are all going die through drought, etc, etc , etc I would own the world not just be the richest.
You don’t get any better do you Joel?

April 26, 2013 1:51 am

@ Konrad says:
April 25, 2013 at 11:49 pm
I am not sure that any parallels with a war, with two distinct and essentially foreign armies facing each other is applicable here. In such a (cliched) situation, one army is vanquished and allowing an escape is prudent and without cost because they abandon the ground, allowing it to be occupied by the the victor.
This situation is not like that, it is better seen as an army (humanity and/or a society) which has been infiltrated by traitors. These traitors have inserted themselves into significant positions. When discovered, in any army, they are dealt with. Ruthlessly and completely. And it is essential that this be so.
For all the unrelenting hype and propaganda, the numbers of people involved here are very very small. There are significant numbers of camp followers, but these in themselves are insignificant compared to the settled or uninvolved population.
There are others in ancillary roles whose claim would be “we service any army”. Their culpability is generally debatable.
The actual protagonists are tiny in relation to a world population of 7 billion, and tiny in any one country in which they are based. Their strength is entirely in the structural positioning they have been able to attain. If revealed for what they are, that disappears. They are then entirely vulnerable. And it is beholden on society to then judge and dispose of them in a manner that does not need to take any protestations they make, or prior structural advantage they had, into account at all.
This then is purely a matter of societal will.
I completely agree that the advent of the internet, both as communication and as record, changes everything. There can be no escape from this. What at a different time could be obscured and avoided now cannot.
As to new people, clearly. But not just that, new (to current practice) standards and values and a rigor in maintaining them in the face of the “inconvenient” whether personal or political.

April 26, 2013 1:55 am

Lil Fella from OZ says:
April 25, 2013 at 5:13 pm
Thank you for all your efforts in science Dr.Gray. Enjoy putting your feet up you deserve it.
Please note, I heard the Chairman of the IPCC, Rajendra Pachauri, state in an interview this year while visiting OZ that it would take many more years of non warming to change the thinking at IPCC. I think it was something like 40 years. Enough said!

Pachauri either does not know what he is talking about or he is attempting to deceive. This moving of goalposts cannot fly as per Santerr and 17 years of temp standstill and NOAA [pdf] 15 years of standstill required to discredit the models with 95% certainty. A few more years of standstill and the models will be shown to be 100% wrong.
Here are some insightful quotes:

Dr. Phil Jones – CRU emails – 5th July, 2005
“The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has but it is only 7 years of data and it isn’t statistically significant….”
Dr. Phil Jones – CRU emails – 7th May, 2009
‘Bottom line: the ‘no upward trend’ has to continue for a total of 15 years before we get worried.’
Dr. Mojib Latif – Spiegel – 19th November 2009
“At present, however, the warming is taking a break,”…….”There can be no argument about that,”
Dr. Phil Jones – BBC – 13th February 2010
“I’m a scientist trying to measure temperature. If I registered that the climate has been cooling I’d say so. But it hasn’t until recently – and then barely at all. The trend is a warming trend.”
Dr. Phil Jones – BBC – 13th February 2010
[Q] B – “Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming”
[A] “Yes, but only just”.
Dr. Robert K. Kaufmann – PNAS – 2nd June 2011
“… has been unclear why global surface temperatures did not rise between 1998 and 2008…..”
Dr. Gerald A. Meehl – Nature Climate Change – 18th September 2011
“There have been decades, such as 2000–2009, when the observed globally averaged surface-temperature time series shows little increase or even a slightly negative trend1 (a hiatus period)….”
Dr. James Hansen – The Economist – 30th March 2013
“the five-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade.” . . .

April 26, 2013 2:06 am

@ Jimbo says:
April 26, 2013 at 1:55 am
This is the sort of stuff that needs to be collected, collated, and highlighted. There is, on the record, sufficient in the way of claims and actions for significant numbers of these people – Pachauri among them – to be discredited.
The whole AGW program can be rejected purely on the basis of previous statements and revised statements, which illustrate the emptiness of any scientific claims and the character of those making them.

Tage Andersson
April 26, 2013 2:12 am

SINTEF is a Norwegian institute. It is a pity that neither politicians nor journalists will read this important paper

Anders Valland
April 26, 2013 2:31 am

GuestBlogger, Vincent or Moderator: Could you please fix the part about SINTEF being “Swedish Research Institute”? It is definitely not Swedish. SINTEF is Norwegian (, it is the largest non-profit, independent research organisation in Scandinavia. It is a matter of pride for us Norwegians, and I would like you to fix it. What this piece says is comparable to calling MIT a Canadian research institute. You would not like that.
[Done. Mod]

April 26, 2013 2:50 am

Dr Gray, happy, long, healthy retirement. Many thanks for all your hard work.

April 26, 2013 4:55 am

“Whether or not it is the beginning of the end or just the “end of the beginning,” VICTORY is assured.”
I wish I shared your enthusiasm. While there are many indications that the general population is becoming less trusting and accepting of the hype, most in government are forging ahead, as their endeavors yield both votes and power. Policies rarely make sense, and they are not something that we, as a population, get to vote on or control.
California?…full steam ahead.
Mass?…full steam ahead.
Obama?…full steam ahead.
etc, etc.
Look at ethanol? Scientifically shown to be at best neutral to the environment, and pretty good consensus that it’s in fact harmful, no only to the environment, but many other aspects of the economy. Yet the U.S. gov is getting ready to INCREASE the mandate from 10% to 15% ethanol content in gasoline. Does the majority want this to happen? No. Would anyone with knowledge of the facts want this to happen? No. Will the government do it anyway? You bet.
And I’m an optimist.

David Ball
April 26, 2013 6:28 am

It will never be “over”. Coming soon to a school near you;
I love the assertion that the ocean is 30% more acidic than 200 years ago.
The hydra just raises a different head.

April 26, 2013 7:04 am

I hope we are at the beginning of the end. Every time I speak with a poor person who cannot pay their utility bills, I want to ask what they think about climate change/global warming. Instead, I recommend a charity that offers help to those who can’t afford their bills. (No, Legal Aid can’t pay your bills; No, we can’t sue the power company for you; and No, we can’t stop them from turning off your electricity (outside of the very limited exceptions to that policy.)) On one hand, for those in that situation, the end can’t come soon enough. On the other, much of the damage is already done economically. My thanks to Dr. Gray, Anthony, and all those who speak out much more forcefully that I do.

April 26, 2013 7:16 am

And a new low springtime record low iin Houston on the 20th: 5 degrees below the 1901 record of 41, degrees Fahrenheit of course.

April 26, 2013 8:11 am

Money, money, money, follow the money, for that’s what the global warming crowd has done for years. As long as tax dollars flow to global warming schemes, the parasites will swarm to those schemes.
Conversely, if the taxpayers wise up (and they are currently doing just that), they are likely to quite suddenly boot from office everyone complicit in raising their taxes for the past few decades while raising the price of all energy sources at the same time. When that day comes, and it will, the newly-governing parties will need to do one thing to put an end to the entire matter.
Cut off the global warmist’s lifeblood, i.e., cut off the money. Zero out every budget that is supporting a warmist, whether that be a builder of windmills or solar panels, or a university professor building hockey sticks, or an environmental agency in full cahoots with the crowd for years, or an advisor advising more green projects, or a manufacturer of green cars. Zero them all out, no matter how crucial their services appear.
Then, as it becomes obvious that their departments were doing at least some good, somewhere, gradually add back funding to only those functions. But first, go to zero. It’s the only way to clear out the rot. Otherwise, they will just lay low and fester, screwing things up to the best of their abilities, certain to rise again when the politics change and funding loosens once more.
Leftist love government, and are perfectly willing to spend significant portions of their miserable lives laying in wait, performing no useful function as long as they receive a taxpayer-funded check, so long as a shot remains at regaining power once again. Zero them out. No funding. Zero, Nada, Zilch. A zero budget is the only wooden stake that will work for a Leftist.
As just one example of the futility of making modest cuts, observe the present air traffic control fiasco in the U.S. as a result of a mild attempt to simply restrain the growth of Leftist funding. A devout Leftist will risk your life, or at least your livelihood, for funding dollars in a heartbeat. Zeroing out the funding of the Left is the only practical solution in the end.

William Astley
April 26, 2013 8:15 am

Thank-you Dr. Vincent Gray on your astonishing long time efforts to address the many issues related to climate ‘change’ and the extreme AGW paradigm.
Best wishes,
The beginning of the end of the extreme AGW movement and paradigm is occurring for three reasons:
1) Scientific analysis and observed temperature rise does not support the extreme AGW warming paradigm. The warming due to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 will be less than 1C with most of the warming occurring at high latitudes which will cause the biosphere to expand (Lindzen and Choi 2011). The so called ‘skeptic’ scientists and bloggers have been able to make the facts known to the technically astute. There is no global warming crisis. Commercial greenhouse operators inject CO2 into their greenhouse to increase yields and reduce growing times (optimum CO2 for plants is 1000 ppm to 1200 ppm). The yield for cereal crops increases by roughly 40% for a doubling of CO2 levels from 280 ppm to 560 ppm which will occur towards the end of this century. The increase in atmospheric CO2 is causing the biosphere to expand and to be more productive. CO2 is beneficial not a problem.
2) Western governments have run out of deficit money to spend. Unavoidable budget cuts will be required. Western governments do not have sufficient funds to pay for current entitlements. Entitlements, government programs, and government departments will be cut. There is no other option. There is no money left to spend on scams which have not reduced local and certainly not world CO2 emissions. If one is aware of point 1 point 2 is particularly important. The public’s attention is and will be jobs, taxes, and entitlements cuts. Governments will do whatever is required to get elected.
3) To significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions – as opposed to spending money on green scams which make almost no difference in total CO2 emissions – a massive move to nuclear power is required. The green fanatics have stopped the Western nuclear program.
The fanatics have created a dystopia fantasy in which they see themselves as heroes fighting a noble cause. They live in a bubble surrounded by other fanatics. They do not care that science and logic does not support the extreme AGW paradigm. They do not care that there is not global warming crisis to solve. They do not care that CO2 emissions are beneficial to the biosphere. There are fanatics.
Timothy Wirth, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Global Issues, seconded Strong’s statement: “We have got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”
“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony … climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” – Christine Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment
“The models are convenient fictions that provide something very useful.”Dr David Frame, Climate modeler, Oxford University
“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.” – Paul Watson,
Co-founder of Greenpeace”
“Unless we announce disasters no one will listen.” – Sir John Houghton, First chairman of the IPCC
“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.” Prof. Chris Folland, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research
Well funded fanatics will continue to push the AGW issue up until the time there is unequivocal planetary cooling. If and when there is cooling there will be a paradigm shift.

April 26, 2013 8:41 am

When I read happy climate stories like this, I always like to remind myself and review the ONLY cool thing the Global Warmunists ever actually produced (surprising there is even one valuable thing they produced since they are decidedly anti-productivity but here it is): Ladies and Gentlemen from LiveEarth 2007 (sponsored by Dow Chemical), The New Rebirth of Spinal Tap Mark 3 and every bassist in the known universe!

April 26, 2013 9:35 am

jimmaine says:
April 26, 2013 at 4:55 am
David Ball says:
April 26, 2013 at 6:28 am
starzmom says:
April 26, 2013 at 7:04 am
Those were three very sobering comments right in a row, and my mood went from the attic to the cellar. Nevertheless, I thank you. It ain’t over ’til it’s over.

April 26, 2013 9:39 am

The picture accompanying this post reminded me of a sign I saw in Amarillo, Texas – oddly enough outside a private residence named “Toad Hall”:

April 26, 2013 9:48 am

Oh well, if the organizer was from the music department then it must be true… /sarc of course

April 26, 2013 10:06 am

Thanks for your good work, Vincent. Much appreciated.
I have the same feeling that we are seeing a sea change in the debate at the moment.
The alarmists seem to be faltering, no news, now new books, no revelatory research. More and more they are getting caught trying to prop up their hypothesis through questionable methods.
Temperatures are not rising, climate sensitivity is on its way down. No extreme weather events to speak of. No climate refugees. No desertification. Sea level rises as it always has. No accelleration.
So one has to agree that we are seeing the beginning of the end of the climate paradigm.
A well chosen time for a well deserved retirement!

April 26, 2013 10:13 am

On today’s CFACT postings there are some very enlightening posts about how th EPOA is tyrannizing our country.
For myself, I would sum it up like this:
It is not quite correct to describe the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a rogue agency – it is way past the point of being a rogue agency. It has become a criminal enterprise.
The EPA does not serve the public – it oppresses the public
The EPA has become a hate group, little different from the American Nazi Party or the Ku Klux Klan. Its mission is to commit economic vandalism – sabotaging the economy – and thereby inflict hardships on citizens. It proceeds from the usual sorts of ignorance and messianic hubris characteristic of other hate groups. It is racist because the harm it does and intends to do will injure people of color the most, while further enriching white fat cats like Al Gore, Michael Bloomberg, Warren Buffett and George Soros.
The EPA has become an agency aiding, abetting and acting on behalf of hostile foreign governments, in places like Venezuela and the Middle East, which are certainly cheering the EPA on for its mindless opposition to domestic energy development like the Keystone Pipeline, with the object of keeping the U.S. at their mercy.
The EPA doesn’t want the public to know that the pipeline will involve far fewer environmental risks than the current method of transport by tank truck and rail. The pipeline’s operation will release far less pollution into the air than vehicular transport. The EPA knows this, of course, but wants it hushed up so that it can proceed with tearing down the economy without hindrance.
The EPA also knows full well that global warming alarmist dogma is false and has been thoroughly discredited, and is rejected by a huge majority of scientists. This shows that the basis for its actions is conscious, deliberate, fully intentional lying – it is certainly not the public interest.
There is no such thing as “unintended consequences” of actions by government. The effects of government actions establish the intent of the actions. If harm is done, harm is intended.
Additionally, if government functionaries illegally extort money from citizens or illegally seize property, the persons doing the taking must necessarily be presumed to benefit personally from the takings. It is not only the agency that is committing extortion and theft, it is the functionaries themselves.
One can only hope that after their protector in the White House leaves office, the enemy agents now “working” at the EPA will find themselves facing criminal charges for misappropriation of public funds, fraud, extortion, perjury, conspiracy, trespassing, armed robbery, lying to Congress, and official oppression.

April 26, 2013 10:46 am

Thank you sir for continuing the struggle for truth.
I read the “Delingpole” link. I’d seen it,
I pressed “next” though and read a fabulous article about Margaret Thatcher recanting her initial fervor for global warming action. She saw the light, finally.
As an American, this was my only criticism of her. Now it’s gone.
RIP Margaret Thatcher, fellow truthseeker, (aka skeptic).

Bob Diaz
April 26, 2013 12:53 pm

RE: Latitude says:
April 25, 2013 at 2:54 pm
dunno….Calif is still surging ahead…..
California shouldn’t count, we are the STUPID Capitol of the world. ;-))

Jules from Oz
April 26, 2013 4:17 pm

Thank you for this article. I have been flabbergasted by the silence from all us skeptics for so long now. The reason is that sensible, hard working people get on with their lives. Pompous, socialist, parasites have all the time in the world to spread their idiotic rubbish. Forget “hockey sticks”…… Bring out the baseball bats. I am truly concerned for the future my children face. Even the more sensible of the worlds leaders have been bullied into believing this drivel.

Daryl M
April 26, 2013 7:18 pm

Dr. Gray, I would like to thank you for your contribution, but unfortunately I don’t share your optimism that we are near the end of this nonsensical religion called global warming.

April 26, 2013 7:38 pm

Reblogged this on RONNIE JAMES SITE.

April 26, 2013 11:22 pm

Mike Haseler says:
April 25, 2013 at 4:03 pm
The problem with us sceptics … is that we are fast becoming mainstream.
And that will be the end of us sceptics – for what role is there for sceptics when everyone agrees with us?
I’ll answer your question: I will focus on other important things like getting on with my life, happier. Sceptics like conclusion and truth, and what better feeling can one get than to know they stood against the tide, for good reason?

April 27, 2013 2:14 am

Most on-line debates now see alarmists very quickly resorting to the same few old standby arguments:
“….97% of climate scientists say …. “,
“…. you think it is a conspiracy….”
and “… Skeptical Science says…..”
Thankfully we are seeing fewer “…. superstorm Sandy…” and “…droughts and/or floods…”.
But, the “…ocean temperature…” and the “….sea level…” memes still pop up occasionally.
My guess is their ‘proofs’ are starting to ring hollow in their own ears.

April 28, 2013 10:21 am

paulm says April 25, 2013 at 2:43 pm
Maybe you havent seen Obama’s latest tweets about “climate d eniers”.

Looks to be that account is _not_ now actually owned by the Prez, but rather by … let’s just post this excerpt containing a brief timeline to explain things:
His Twitter account was created … on March 5, 2007, two months before he formally announced his presidential candidacy. Throughout that contest, his first term, and second campaign for the presidency, Obama’s campaign staff used it to share news about the president’s policy priorities and to try and engage Americans in his efforts. Then, in January [2013], it handed the reins to Organizing for Action, a new entity that took over much of Obama’s campaign apparatus: website, social media accounts, email list — even the abbreviated shorthand of “OFA.”
MORE from The Atlantic Wire:

PHILIP BUMP, 74,605 Views, APRIL 8, 2013
The 29,503,030 people who follow Barack Obama’s Twitter account might see his picture, see his name, see that little blue verified account badge and think they’re following the President — but it’s not him.
All of the president’s named social media accounts, in fact, have been handed over to a non-partisan, not-for-profit group that isn’t overly concerned if you didn’t notice the transition. As the first sitting President with a Twitter account, the murky handover raises questions that didn’t exist ten years ago — can a politician legally hand over his valuable online identity to an outside group? is it ethical? — and makes clear federal regulators are unprepared to answer them.

“You’re Not Really Following @BarackObama on Twitter”

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights